User talk:AnomieBOT/Archive 12

This is an archive of past discussions about User:AnomieBOT. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Remediation of double double-quote

This edit looks like suboptimal behaviour. Rather than delete the refname maybe it should delete the double double-quote? Dave.Dunford (talk) 09:57, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

TemplateSubster: Template:Summary2 has too many transclusions - Fixed

* Note that TFD substitutions should now be done via User:AnomieBOT/TFDTemplateSubster rather than by (ab)using TemplateSubster!

In an effort to prevent disruption, I refuse to subst templates that have over 5 transclusions unless they are listed at User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force. Please either edit the template to remove it from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, manually subst the existing transclusions, or add it to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force to let me know it is OK to subst them. Possibly added by User:Sdkb at 2020-06-20T05:58:05Z. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:57, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

It looks like the template has 30-some transclusions, which isn't too surprising given its advanced age. I added subst-only auto to mirror {{uw-editsummary}}, a very similar template, and other user warning templates. Is it okay with another human if I tell the bot to go forward here? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 07:03, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sdkb: Yes, it's normal for warning messages to be substituted. John of Reading (talk) (a human) 15:19, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Done Special:Diff/968849149. --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 21:58, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

TemplateSubster: Template:UPIMG has too many transclusions - Fixed?

* Note that TFD substitutions should now be done via User:AnomieBOT/TFDTemplateSubster rather than by (ab)using TemplateSubster!

In an effort to prevent disruption, I refuse to subst templates that have over 5 transclusions unless they are listed at User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force. Please either edit the template to remove it from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, manually subst the existing transclusions, or add it to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force to let me know it is OK to subst them. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:14, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

I see only one transclusion of this template. Marking fixed and I guess we'll see if this reappears. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:44, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Nope. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:18, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Possibly there was database lag in the Toolforge replicas earlier. It looks like the DB query should be returning just one transclusion for the template now. Anomie ⚔ 01:40, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

User:AnomieBOT III

Hello, Anomie,

AnomieBOT III stopped updating the broken redirects pages a couple of days ago. I'm aware of two other bots that stopped functioning properly around July 28th, too, so maybe this is people in Wikipedia HQ changing things without informing y'all. Once again. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:26, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Gift cat!

Gift cat and good luck!

Bxd738 (talk) 14:59, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

TemplateSubster: Template:WikiProject North Dakota has too many transclusions - Fixed

* Note that TFD substitutions should now be done via User:AnomieBOT/TFDTemplateSubster rather than by (ab)using TemplateSubster!

In an effort to prevent disruption, I refuse to subst templates that have over 5 transclusions unless they are listed at User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force. Please either edit the template to remove it from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, manually subst the existing transclusions, or add it to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force to let me know it is OK to subst them. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:29, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

This is because Cbl62 created a bunch of new talk pages that use it without substing it. I added it to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force, so it should automatically take care of them all now. Jackmcbarn (talk) 05:18, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Feature request: link to list of transclusions

@Anomie: Can you make a change to tasks/TemplateSubster.pm, namely changing manually subst the existing transclusions to manually subst [{{fullurl:Special:WhatLinksHere/$title|hidelinks=1&hideredirs=1}} the existing transclusions]? This will make it quicker and more convenient to see what happened. Jackmcbarn (talk) 05:32, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

ok. Anomie ⚔ 17:13, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Italics in quotations removal request.

In the article, Levels (Avicii song), all the quotations are in italics. I have put the article on peer review and someone wants me to remove the italics. I looked at Wikipedia's essay about quotations and apparently italics are against Wikipedia's guidelines. So, once you done fixing you bot, I would like your bot to remove the italics in each quotations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lazman321 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

@Lazman321: For just that one article? Why not just do it manually? It's a lot of work to teach a bot to do a new kind of edit. Jackmcbarn (talk) 17:00, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Removal of maintenance template

Hello, you recently added a maintenance template at Fractal Analytics stating that "this article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments". To confirm, Fractal has not solicited any partner to do such work. There was some updates from the User:Sachi_bbsr but it was voluntary and we have not given him ay form of payment from our side. Please check and request you to remove the maintenance template at the earliest else we will do so in the next three days. --Vinaynair85 (talk) 10:44, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

If you are here because you think AnomieBOT added {{citation needed}} or another maintenance tag to an article, please check again. AnomieBOT only added the current date to a maintenance tag added by another editor in a previous edit. The maintenance tag was actually added by Emufarmers * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 13:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Okay, Thank you.Vinaynair85 (talk) 13:27, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

CFDClerk: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 July 25 is broken - fixed

Help! A section in Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 July 25 contains the "is_closed" regex but not at the beginning of the section. Probably someone put the {{cfd top}} before a section header instead of after. Anyway, I can't do anything to that page until someone fixes it. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:12, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

This happened because some closed CfD's were listed at move review. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion says Wikipedia:Move review can be used to contest the outcome of a CfD request that is limited in scope to renaming, and Wikipedia:Move review says Leave notice of the move review in the same section as, but outside of and above the closed original move discussion. Everything seems to have been done correctly according to the instructions, so I think the bot's regex just needs to be updated to handle this case. Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:04, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Hmm. Fortunately it appears to work exactly like the more common {{Delrevxfd}}, which the bot already handles. Anomie ⚔ 01:57, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

TemplateSubster: Template:Adddisamb has too many transclusions - Fixed

* Note that TFD substitutions should now be done via User:AnomieBOT/TFDTemplateSubster rather than by (ab)using TemplateSubster!

In an effort to prevent disruption, I refuse to subst templates that have over 5 transclusions unless they are listed at User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force. Please either edit the template to remove it from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, manually subst the existing transclusions, or add it to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force to let me know it is OK to subst them. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:17, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

This has no transclusions, but the bot already put this back twice after it was cleared, so I'm going to leave it active this time until @Anomie: sees it and hopefully knows what's going wrong. Jackmcbarn (talk) 04:22, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Jackmcbarn, not Anomie, but I think it may be that {{Adddisamb}} contains {{documentation|content={{subst only|auto=yes}}}} which adds it into Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, so I guess the bot is processing it per User:AnomieBOT/docs/TemplateSubster? Not sure what's up with the "too many transclusions" part though ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 14:49, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Probably has to do with the Toolforge replication lag discussed at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Toolserver replication lag for enwiki is now over 36 hours. I see it's currently showing 63 hours lag on the "web" replicas for s1 (which is enwiki). Anomie ⚔ 15:29, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

FYI: AnomieBOT uses the "web" replicas for TemplateSubster (for fetching the category members and counting their transclusions), EnDashRedirectCreator (for finding redirects needing creating/updating), and TemplateTalkRedirectCreator (for finding talk pages needing creation). It uses "analytics" for BrokenRedirectDeleter (for finding broken redirects). The choice is somewhat arbitrary; but "web" is supposed to be more responsive while "analytics" is supposed to be for longer-running queries. All the other tasks don't use the Toolforge replicas at all, just the Action API. Anomie ⚔ 15:34, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Marking fixed. It's been 3 days; hopefully the toolserver has caught up by now. Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:39, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Society of United Irishmen: "by whom?" queries

Two "by whom?" questions: (1) by the sources cited (7), i.e. Fleischacher and Broadie. (2) that the Glorious Revolution (and its Bill Rights) was an advance in England along the lines of "limited and accountable" government is such a general historical judgement that it would be more a matter of finding contrarian sources to contest it. ThankManfredHugh (talk) 17:18, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @ManfredHugh: Which edits is this in relation to? Provide diffs please. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:28, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

@ManfredHugh: I'm guessing you were confused by this edit into thinking that AnomieBOT somehow added {{by whom?}} to the article. If you look closely, you'll see it was actually added by User:122.56.100.98 in the previous edit. All AnomieBOT did was add |date=August 2020 to the templates to track when they were added. Anomie ⚔ 19:46, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

TemplateSubster: Template:Db-significance-deleted has too many transclusions - Fixed

* Note that TFD substitutions should now be done via User:AnomieBOT/TFDTemplateSubster rather than by (ab)using TemplateSubster!

In an effort to prevent disruption, I refuse to subst templates that have over 5 transclusions unless they are listed at User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force. Please either edit the template to remove it from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, manually subst the existing transclusions, or add it to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force to let me know it is OK to subst them. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:10, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

This appears to be the result of this page move. I have no idea why this is, though, since the bot didn't seem to have a problem with it at its old title, and it didn't gain any new transclusions as a result of the move. Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:59, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

The old title is on the force list. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:38, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Duh, that would do it. List updated. Jackmcbarn (talk) 00:43, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

TemplateSubster: Template:Db-significance-notice has too many transclusions - Fixed

* Note that TFD substitutions should now be done via User:AnomieBOT/TFDTemplateSubster rather than by (ab)using TemplateSubster!

In an effort to prevent disruption, I refuse to subst templates that have over 5 transclusions unless they are listed at User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force. Please either edit the template to remove it from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, manually subst the existing transclusions, or add it to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force to let me know it is OK to subst them. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:12, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm not going to add this to the list, because I'm not sure it should be on the list. As near as I can tell, this template has been transcluded on about 40 db-template /docs for years, and has been subst-only for all that time. I don't think we should be substing the /doc uses, because if the template changes the notice should change as well.

In other words, I'm not really sure what's going on but blindly adding it to the list isn't going to fix it. Primefac (talk) 00:34, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

@Primefac: This appears to be the exact same situation as the one above it. Jackmcbarn (talk) 00:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

The aformentioned transclusions on /doc pages are, or should be if they aren't, tagged with |demo=yes or |nosubst=yes, which prevents the bot from substing them. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:38, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

As was pointed out to me above, these were already added to the list, but the list doesn't take page moves into account. I just updated it manually. Jackmcbarn (talk) 00:43, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Please take a look

This bot added back endorsements on the page 2020 United States Senate election in Alabama which were only Twitter endorsements and don’t qualify as endorsements on the encyclopedia. Why did it do that? Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 21:18, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

The bot rescued orphaned named references because edits by Lima Bean Farmer left big red error messages in the article. If you want to delete a named reference, it is important to delete all instances of that named reference throughout the article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:47, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Well I don’t know but it appears that the bot edits were reverted Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 21:56, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Not at all. A human editor fully removed the references that Lima Bean Farmer only partially removed, with the helpful edit summary "removed poorly referenced info". – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:10, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

TemplateSubster: Template:WikiProject Delaware has too many transclusions - Fixed

* Note that TFD substitutions should now be done via User:AnomieBOT/TFDTemplateSubster rather than by (ab)using TemplateSubster!

In an effort to prevent disruption, I refuse to subst templates that have over 5 transclusions unless they are listed at User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force. Please either edit the template to remove it from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, manually subst the existing transclusions, or add it to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force to let me know it is OK to subst them. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:20, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Bharatpur state

The subject matter added to the page regarding the lineage of the Bharatpur royal family , is factually wrong and has no proof , infact the Jat state was established by churaman Jat who was a landowner , and was successful in establishing the Bharatpur state in the 17th century . It is true that the Bharatpur royal family claims yadhuvanshi lineage but the , manufactured story added regarding that lineage is purposely written in a way to hurt the pride of the Jat community and the sources cited do not have any recognition. Meethamonkey (talk) 10:19, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

@Meethamonkey: The very large banner that you saw while posting this message says If you are here because you think AnomieBOT added {{citation needed}} or another maintenance tag to an article, please check again. AnomieBOT only added the current date to a maintenance tag added by another editor in a previous edit. As you can clearly see in the page history, it is indeed the case that AnomieBOT only added dates to the {{cn}} tags. It was in fact JzG who added the tags in the first place, so if you disagree, you should tell him instead. Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Jackmcbarn, or just fix it. The tags were added when I removed an unreliable source, it's not a surprise that the information it provided was incorrect. Guy (help! - typo?) 21:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the info. I have told JzG the issue now . I can't figur out as to how I can edit the page myself but thanks anyways . Meethamonkey (talk) 22:40, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

TemplateSubster: Template:Make cite iucn has too many transclusions

* Note that TFD substitutions should now be done via User:AnomieBOT/TFDTemplateSubster rather than by (ab)using TemplateSubster!

In an effort to prevent disruption, I refuse to subst templates that have over 5 transclusions unless they are listed at User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force. Please either edit the template to remove it from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, manually subst the existing transclusions, or add it to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force to let me know it is OK to subst them. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:15, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

TemplateSubster: Template:Twocopies has too many transclusions - Fixed

* Note that TFD substitutions should now be done via User:AnomieBOT/TFDTemplateSubster rather than by (ab)using TemplateSubster!

In an effort to prevent disruption, I refuse to subst templates that have over 5 transclusions unless they are listed at User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force. Please either edit the template to remove it from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, manually subst the existing transclusions, or add it to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force to let me know it is OK to subst them. Possibly added by User:Robert McClenon at 2020-07-26T17:33:16Z. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:30, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

User:Anomie - Maybe when you have a few minutes, you can explain. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:32, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, when you decline a draft and use {{twocopies}} in your decline summary, it leaves it at both the draft and the user page. Thus, if you decline three drafts using that rationale, suddenly there are six transclusions, which triggers this notice. You should be subst'ing your decline rationales, especially if you are going to be using them repeatedly in a short period of time. Primefac (talk) 19:26, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

User:Primefac - That is now a clear explanation. The bot is saying that I am giving the bot too much work to do, because it has encountered the template as needing substitution more than 5 times in some period of time. Now I understand. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:35, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Possible bug

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cave_diving&type=revision&diff=973554550&oldid=973518353

An unexpected response to a ref name typo. Did not actually fix the error, just substituted different errors. I don't know if it is worth the effort of fixing, but it had me baffled until I spotted the typo. On the other hand it may be quite a common typo - it happens to me quite often, particularly on touch screen keyboards. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 06:16, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

There's only so much GIGO that the bot can account for. The list of "common typos" could grow quickly: "mame", "nane", "mane", "nsme", "bane", "namr", and so on. Anomie ⚔ 17:37, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Why doesn't the bot ignore garage, instead of smearing it around and making a bigger mess? The edit in question here removed a referenced paragraph that would've been appropriately fixed by a human editor; but with the error removed, we were lucky to catch the problem that the Bot tried to hide under the bed.-- Mikeblas (talk) 17:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Irrelevant references

I see that AnomieBOT is "rescuing" references by placing irrelevant references under certain reference names. Why does it do this? It ends up placing a reference that appears like it might be useful, but really isn't -- and can't possibly be, in fact. Does a human review the references that are "rescued"? (What does "rescue" really mean, anyway?) The problem is that the references don't pass verification, but aren't likely to be verified because they don't look particularly suspect. -- Mikeblas (talk) 17:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Mikeblas: I assume that you refer to this edit. Consider the version immediately before: in the references section there are five big red error messages. The fault is with Sakiv (talk · contribs) who left the article in that condition. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:54, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@Redrose64: Indeed, the references weren't defined. But the problem I'm describing is with AnomeBot's edits, which chose an arbitrary definition of a reference from somewhere else in the encyclopedia and placed them in this article where they're not appropriate or useful. -- Mikeblas (talk) 13:37, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@Redrose64: What do you mean?? I only copied the transfers from this page---Sakiv (talk) 07:58, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

You didn't copy the whole ref, with the result of the red error messages that I indicated earlier. You should check your work, both before and after saving. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:22, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

What's the problem, if the bot will go through my links and fix them later?--Sakiv (talk) 13:29, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

The bot is not infallible, as can be seen in numerous places on this talk page and in the archives. All it takes is a misspelled ref name or a reference not appearing in another location to break a reference. While the bots do a lot of work on this site, you should never trust them to do it 100% of the time. Primefac (talk) 14:18, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Gran Canaria airport

Why you changed the information of Gran Canaria airport? Do you work there too? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2E02:2A8E:1F00:F5AD:38AA:17A0:88C7 (talk) 22:27, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

It would be helpful for a diff, but I doubt that the bot was actually changing content. Primefac (talk) 23:48, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Kasamh se

I'm sick and tired of people reverting my edits, I'm officially leaving Wikipedia as an editor.goodbye JudahPrerna (talk) 08:47, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

JudahPrerna, sad to see you go, but just so you know this is a bot's page, so I'm not really sure who you're trying to inform about leaving. I do notice that you have a long message on your talk page with advice, which will hopefully keep you from getting reverted as often. Either way, you do what you feel is best for you; Wikipedia isn't for everyone. Primefac (talk) 12:43, 2 September 2020 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

Transclusion limits

Based on this old discussion, this new discussion (permalink), a desire to avoid this nonsense, and (according to bradv) the fact that this sort of vandalism hasn't been attempted since May, do you think it would be possible to raise the TemplateSubster force max back to 100? I'm more than okay with reinstating it should the problem resurface, but right now if an editor sprays thousands of transclusions across 20 templates it really gums up the works. Primefac (talk) 18:53, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

These attacks have completely stopped since the introduction of Special:AbuseFilter/1052, which remains enabled in case they start again. The bot transclusion limit is completely redundant, and should be raised back to its original level. – bradv🍁 18:59, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I explicitly suggested that myself back in May. The lower limit appears to be creating a lot of bureaucratic churn for little benefit. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:49, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@Primefac, Bradv, and Pppery: I've introduced User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster max transclusions to hold the limit, in case it does turn out to need to be changed again in the future while I'm still on low activity. The bot will complain here if that page is unprotected or is changed to not contain an integer. Anomie ⚔ 02:02, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks for doing that. It's on my watchlist. Primefac (talk) 02:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Should specify new location when closing a TfD as "moved without redirect"

In Special:Diff/976915516, Pigsonthewing amended a closure performed by the bot to specify where the page was moved to. It would be useful if the bot were to do that itself without other editors needing to manually add it. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:55, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Good idea. Done. Anomie ⚔ 02:10, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

FFD configuration

Hello!

When files that subject of an FFD get moved to Commons and consequently locally deleted per WP:CSD#F8 your bot closes these FFDs as deleted, but I think they rather should be closed as kept and moved to Commons. Do you agree?Jonteemil (talk) 13:19, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Seems too much effort to determine the difference between "FFD filed, then someone uploaded to Commons and it was deleted locally" and "Someone uploaded to Commons, then an FFD was filed and it was deleted locally" when the end result is exactly the same. The bot does note in its close when the deletion resulted in a Commons file at the same name being visible. Anomie ⚔ 19:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Added inappropriate references

The bot added legal complaints from the person’s lawyer as the source for factual statements in the article. Legal complaints aren’t reliable sources in most cases. I just removed those a few hours ago per Wikipedia policy.

I don’t understand why your bot would insert inappropriate references that had just been removed without a word to the person who just removed them?

The article is Jill Kelley.

Fat Irish Guy (talk) 19:58, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

@Fat Irish Guy: Please check the page history, your removals were incomplete and left big red error messages. AnomieBOT was merely fixing the error messages. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:53, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

I will. Thanks.

So the bot searches out red links and attempts to clean them up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fat Irish Guy (talk • contribs) 00:21, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

I think we’d have all been better served if it had marked and notified the editor instead of revert the whole thing. JMO

Fat Irish Guy (talk) 00:52, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

No red links were involved, I wrote "big red error messages" and that is what may be seen at this version, there are two of them, nos. 11 & 38. The bot also did not carry out any reversion. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:17, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Sleeping

AnomieBOT has been sleeping now for about 14 hours. Laziness! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:59, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Looks like I used a new Perl feature in code I pushed last night, that needed a "use feature" to work with the version of Perl on Toolforge. Anomie ⚔ 16:34, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Same for AnomieBOT III. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:40, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

While AnomieBOT III was affected by the same thing, it also looks like it just hasn't had any broken redirects to delete so far today. Anomie ⚔ 21:18, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Well, it's gone from updating roughly every 6 hours to not updating in 2 days. Although the number of broken redirects varies (it's typically dependent on AfD closures), I've never seen it go this long without posting some broken redirects in main, talk, draft, user, category or template space. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:34, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Looks like phab:T262239. Anomie ⚔ 18:25, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

That case was closed as resolved and broken redirects were updated for a couple days but the bot has gone back to sleep and I don't see a new ticket. Maybe some 2-3 day database lag? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:03, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Looks like there's actual lag now, per https://replag.toolforge.org/. Anomie ⚔ 19:25, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

There's been a non-insignificant replag since 7 September. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:35, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject tagging

Hi there, need help tagging talk pages in Category:Phoenicia and all its subcats with Template:WikiProject Phoenicia. Members did not oppose.
Please just tag, don't assess with the wikiprojects WPBanner, assessment will be made by the project members.
I have also been using Template:PHOA in lieu of the WPBanner tag, please replace these with the WP tag.
The project overlaps often with WP:Ancient Near East and WP:Lebanon, if we need individual WP member clearance I would like to forgo tagging articles related to other wikiprojects. Thank you for your assistance. ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 10:57, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Bot appears to be down

Anomie, the bot does not appear to have edited for over 22 hours. Does it need a cookie? – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:52, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. It seems something on Toolforge caused all the bot's processes to hang. I've restarted them all now. Anomie ⚔ 16:13, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

OrphanReferenceFixer: Blacklisted orphaned reference in Siliguri

When trying to fix orphaned refs in Siliguri, MediaWiki's spam blacklist complained about census2011.co.in. This probably means someone didn't properly clean up after themselves when blacklisting the link and removing existing uses, but a human needs to double-check it. The attempted changes were:

Siliguri revision 982158107:
- Rescued "censusindia2" from rev 982137063
  Removed in revision 982139691 by Nagrika1 (talk • contribs • logs) with comment "/* Demographics */" (removed 146/86287 bytes, 0%)

You might also use {{subst:User:Anomie/uw-orphans|1=rm diff|2=fix diff}} to let the remover know, if their edit summary indicates they were specifically removing the blacklisted ref. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:14, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Hurricane Delta Sources

Hiya,

Thanks for editing my additions to the Hurricane Delta lead; I notice you've marked one of the sources as unreliable. I wanted to have a discussion about this - Levi Cowan who is the author of the tweet the source refers to, is a meteorologist supporting the Hurricane Research Division of the NOAA - was just wondering what your thoughts would be? He has professional knowledge so I'm not sure it is unreliable?

Best Bellminsterboy (talk) 08:02, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

You appear to be confused. AnomieBOT's edit just added |date=October 2020 to the tag; the tag itself was added in the previous edit by SounderBruce. You should contact that user to discuss the matter. Anomie ⚔ 23:08, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

OnThisDayTagger

This edit at Talk:List of days of the year looks like a mistake. Does the code need a tweak to account for the recent page move? -- John of Reading (talk) 06:45, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes it does.

Done Anomie ⚔ 13:52, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Losing information

I notice that AnomieBOT sometimes loses information; in this case, the "abruf" parameter, an alias for "zugriff", was ignored and its contents were deleted upon substitution. Would it be possible to detect when that happens, and preserve the information somewhere? I assume the bot keeps logs somewhere...

Eelworm (talk) 09:03, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

The bot cannot preserve this information, other than in the article history. If you want the information somehow preserved post-subst, edit the appropriate template so the information is included in the substed output. Anomie ⚔ 00:56, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! So it's a limitation of the bot? I have no idea about the bot's actual code (is it available?), so I'll take your word for it, but it is an unfortunate limitation. The point is that losing information is never acceptable, even if the template is incomplete. Eelworm (talk) 08:05, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with the bot. The problem needs to be addressed at Template talk:Internetquelle, where it looks like you have posted already. Someone may be able to adjust the template for you. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:49, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

It has everything to do with the bot. We can't assume every template to be up-to-date all the time: it's invalid to perform a substitution dropping an "unknown" parameter. If it's a long-standing bug in the bot we should go over the logs to undo the damage once the bug has been fixed.

To summarize: the bot appears to silently drop "extra" template parameters. It shouldn't. It's very easy to detect this situation, which may be caused by a typo or an out-of-date template. There are a number of options for what to do in that case, and all of them are better than silently losing information. Eelworm (talk) 18:07, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

@Eelworm: I suggest that you read up on WP:SUBST, and also look at the code underlying Template:Internetquelle. That should help you understand what happens if you replace

{{Internetquelle |url=https://www.airliners.de/flughafen-dortmund-2019-passagierrekord/53234 |titel=Flughafen Dortmund stellt 2019 deutlichen Passagierrekord auf |abruf=2020-01-06}}

with

{{subst:Internetquelle |url=https://www.airliners.de/flughafen-dortmund-2019-passagierrekord/53234 |titel=Flughafen Dortmund stellt 2019 deutlichen Passagierrekord auf |abruf=2020-01-06}}

which is what AnomieBOT did. It is up to the maintainers of Template:Internetquelle to decide whether |abruf=2020-01-06 should map to a valid {{cite web}} parameter, or not. At present, it doesn't; so substing the template drops the infotmation. That is not AnomieBOT's fault. But here's a thing for you: if I take the template transclusion from the version of the page before AnomieBOT's edit, i.e. the first block of code above, this is what it displays:

"Flughafen Dortmund stellt 2019 deutlichen Passagierrekord auf". Retrieved 2020-01-06. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |nosubst= ignored (help)

So, since the date 2020-01-06 wasn't displayed to begin with, it cannot have been lost. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:50, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Of course it was lost! It was lost from the wikitext. If Template:Internetquelle is fixed now, it won't magically reappear. As you say, substing the template drops information. It shouldn't.

I have no idea why you think it's useful to imply I haven't understood what's happening here (and the page you link to is about explicit {{subst:...}} substitutions, which are different from what's being discussed here). It's not. Eelworm (talk) 08:10, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

We are under the impression that you haven't understood because on at least three occasions, you have asserted that the fault lies with AnomieBOT. You can easily verify that it is nothing to do with AnomieBOT by editing a page - any page, but WP:Sandbox is best - and pasting in this line:

{{Internetquelle |url=https://www.airliners.de/flughafen-dortmund-2019-passagierrekord/53234 |titel=Flughafen Dortmund stellt 2019 deutlichen Passagierrekord auf |abruf=2020-01-06}}

Now save it. Does the 2020-01-06 get displayed? No, it doesn't. Edit the page to verify that 2020-01-06 is still there, and when doing so, insert the six characters subst: immediately after the pair of opening braces (which is all that AnomieBOT did), and save. Now, edit the page again and you will see that 2020-01-06 is not there. Does that make it the fault of AnomieBOT? Absolutely not, since AnomieBOT was not involved. Does it make it your fault? By your arguments above, yes it does.

What we are saying is that the fault lies either in Template:Internetquelle itself for not providing any code to use |abruf=, or it lies in Template:Internetquelle/doc for implying that |abruf= is a valid parameter when all tests show that it is not. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:57, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Adding "subst:" to the template invocation is what AnomieBOT did. It should absolutely not have done so, blindly, given that the invocation used unknown parameters. It led to the loss of information, and it might have led to the loss of interesting information in other templates. It makes sense that there is a bot involved in the process, rather than having the mediawiki software automatically substitute some templates. That is because bots have more opportunities to be careful not to perform substitutions that lose or misrepresent information, such as by performing a basic check for unknown parameters. Eelworm (talk) 10:16, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

It absolutely should have done so, because that is exactly what it is being instructed to do. AnomieBOT is a bot, not a human; it cannot make considered decisions, it acts according to specific instructions. In this case the specific instruction to add subst: is in the form of the {{Subst only|auto=yes}} that is in the template's doc page, which has been there for over four years now, being moved from the template itself to the doc page by Andy M. Wang (talk · contribs); the decision to make it subst-only was originally made on 9 September 2016 by Pigsonthewing (talk · contribs) with this edit. Complain to either Andy (M. Wang or Mabbett) if you like, but do not blame AnomieBOT. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:55, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm talking about a simple programmatic check ("is this template invocation being passed parameters the substitution template never looks at"), not any kind of "considered decision". And I'm unlikely to complain to human editors about AnomieBOT failing to perform such a simple check, particularly since, as far as I can see, they've done nothing wrong. Templates change, making a previous decision to auto-substitute invalid in some cases. We can detect most of those cases. We should. (Going through AnomieBOT's recent edits, it seems to be dropping the author's name from some citations. That's a pretty bad thing to do in academic circles.)

But we're going in circles here: there's a limitation in AnomieBOT which causes it to delete encyclopedic information (except from the article history, whence it is very difficult to restore) in articles when a substitution template is out of date and fails to reference newly-valid parameters. This behavior is unintended by all of the human editors involved in the process. I've informed the bot's author of the problem, and am obviously still hoping for a substantive response. Eelworm (talk) 14:07, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

If there is a problem with substing of a particular template, stop it from being substed until the problem is fixed. The bot is just following human instructions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:15, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Just to pile on (as BAG and late-to-the-party tps), this is not a bot issue, for all of the reasons stated above. Primefac (talk) 14:55, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Parameter case

I just saw the bot add |date= to {{citation needed}} when |Date= was already present. This still leaves the article marked as having an unsupported para. Can the bot detect this and just change Date to date? MB 17:20, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

TFDTemplateSubster for orphaning

Just curious, Anomie, can User:AnomieBOT/TFDTemplateSubster be used to carry out orphan outcomes by fully noincluding, or blanking, the template and then shoving it onto that page? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 23:11, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Why wouldn't it be able to? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:07, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

If a subst produces the desired result, the bot can do it. Anomie ⚔ 00:44, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

ProcrastinatingReader, you weren't around when we last had this discussion (and no, I don't have diffs, but I seem to recall it was something around late 2018/early 2019), but that is absolutely not what the bot should be doing. If an orphaning needs to take place, there are two other bots that can handle that with much more specific edit summaries. Primefac (talk) 14:54, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Primefac, I had a feeling that'd be the answer. Mostly just wondered out of curiosity - we have active bots that do orphaning (you and Spork), so mostly a question for reference rather than something I was planning to do. Thanks all. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 16:33, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Fair enough. And as Anomie said, your question/setup is possible to do, just not something we like doing. Primefac (talk) 17:32, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Note a discussion in late 2018/early 2019 would have been about TemplateSubster rather than TFDTemplateSubster. IIRC the main issue was, as mentioned, that TemplateSubster's edit summary proved to be confusing when a template substed to nothing; TFDTemplateSubster is better as it'll link to the TFD, but it'll still refer to it as "substing" rather than "removing" which may still be confusing. Anomie ⚔ 13:17, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Interesting. So, if it is still not permitted, the issue is purely one of edit summary, nothing technical? Would the blanking/noinclude thing I describe would achieve exactly the same effect (technically), i.e. no extra spaces, newlines, or other undesired behaviour? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 15:53, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

AnomieBOT substs the template, and if the template substed to nothing and it was the only thing on the line it removes a newline too. It doesn't do anything else with trying to clean up whitespace. Anomie ⚔ 00:51, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Right (re: PR), it was an edit summary issue and not a technical one. Primefac (talk) 17:57, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Right, and I believe that was what predicated the TFD subster being created. Primefac (talk) 17:57, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

TFDTemplateSubster was created more because TemplateSubster didn't link the TFD in edit summaries and usually needed forcing for TFD substs. Anomie ⚔ 20:02, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

So if this is still an issue, it's resolved by adding an "orphan" param or something to the /row template? That's assuming that this should be supported, of course (there's a slight risk of someone changing a template mid-subst when orphaning, but I guess that goes for any template being substed). ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 14:10, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

This is not an issue, because it is not done. Primefac (talk) 19:08, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Also, I should clarify that almost every instance of using the TFDsubster is orphaning a template, but you're referring to "orphaning by blanking" which is not (and should not) be done under the current consensus. Primefac (talk) 19:12, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@ProcrastinatingReader: So, get consensus (at WT:TFD or other appropriate venue, not here) that people want this, and what exactly needs to change about the bot's edit summary or whatever, and I'll figure out a good way to implement it. Without people actually wanting AnomieBOT to do this, I'm not going to spend time trying to figure out what might need changing. Anomie ⚔ 00:40, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

That's fair. As I say, I was mostly just curious on why it isn't done currently / musing on the technical side (both answered now). Practically, I don't usually a backlog of orphans at holding, and fac is active with his bot, so I don't think there's immediate need. But yeah, if that situation ever changes it may be worth discussion. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 15:23, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Aggressive

This guy needs to be less aggressive. I was in the middle of upgrading an article called The Radio Reader and had just put in a couple more citation refs; when I tried to save them I got stepped on by an editing conflict message. As a result I had to reload the page and start over the whole addition of the citation, and a couple other changes I'd made.

According to the article history, looks like the conflict came from AnomieBot. [1] It's been about 10 years since I've experienced an edit-conflict. I'd bet that AnomieBot could have waited an hour - or a day - after my previous edit before 'dating maintenance tags'. Hardly a rush on that, what?

Twang (talk) 18:27, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

AnomieBOT does have a waiting period, and you can always just copy and paste your intended text (at the bottom of the edit conflict screen) over AnomieBOT's version. The bot will not take offense; it will simply wait and apply its tags later. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:14, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Refs orphaned on purpose

I appreciate often the service of rescuing orphaned refs. Sometimes I delete some text and didn't intend to take away the ref from the rest of the article and Anomie restores it. Thanks for that. However, the primary reason I delete refs is because they're unreliable, or unsuitable as references, and so when I orphan a ref, there's a very good chance that I want it gone, and then Anomie comes around and does the opposite of that. Is there a configurable option for this or some tweak that could be done, perhaps? Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 05:42, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

If you remove a ref that is used more than once and then click Preview, which you should always do before saving an edit, you should see a big red error message about the ref you are removing. It is telling you to remove all instances of the ref. AnomieBOT is fixing your error in a non-destructive way. If you want to destroy something, sometimes you need to be more thorough. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:54, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

CHUUClerk - Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations

The bot clerks Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations to add daily sections and adds the text

Requests left here should be addressed on or before [date].

It should read "on or after" since the purpose is to document the hold period for the request. Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 11:31, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

A bit of research - this edit in 2011 flipped the meaning. Cabayi (talk) 11:50, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

The bot won't allow manual fixes to the problem - Special:Diff/985694541 Cabayi (talk) 12:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

That edit was specifically requested by User:xeno at User talk:AnomieBOT/Archive 3#CHUUClerk. I can't find any documentation as to whether there's supposed to be a hold period, or if the text is trying to give an idea of how soon a requester can expect their request to be answered. Anomie ⚔ 13:29, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

It's an on-hold period so that the original owner of the account name which is being usurped has a chance to respond to the email which was sent to them. It's a week on enwiki -

Your request is now complete and ready to be processed after the hold period (usually about a week).

the penultimate bullet point in Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations/Front matter

and a month on meta where it's more rigorously documented

Please note: Per standard procedure, accounts with valid edits are not usurped, and the target account must be notified by renamer at least one month before usurpation.

m:Steward requests/Username changes#Requests involving merges, usurps or other complications

The request won't be serviced before that time. pinging 1997kB who has handled most of the usurpations recently Cabayi (talk) 14:25, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

I am not sure this text is about usurpation, but if it is then yes, wording should be changed. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 14:41, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

In the local system we sometimes processed usurps more speedily especially when it was to help unify. Now that unification is complete, the text can be changed to reflect current practice. –xeno^talk 00:25, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok, adjusted wording. Anomie ⚔ 19:56, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Cabayi (talk)

Substing Template:Anchor in section titles

This is an expansion of AnomieBOT's existing TemplateSubster. {{Subst only}} doesn't have an option for "only in section headers"; I think that this template is the only template which would be relevant, so I don't think it's sensible to add a parameter to the template and modify this bot. Could this bot be expanded to do this? All the best, WT79 ^{(speak to me | editing patterns | what I been doing)} 16:16, 29 October 2020 (UTC) (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.)

I'm going to ask the potentially stupid question, but why on earth would we want to subst calls to {{anchor}}??? Primefac (talk) 22:25, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

For basically the same reason you changed the title of this section: If you edit a section using a template in the header, the auto-generated edit summary winds up including the template invocation, looking ugly and breaking the section link from the history.

@WT79: At first glance this doesn't seem like a task I'd want to pick up for AnomieBOT. The template is transcluded in 76893 pages at the moment, which the bot would need to re-scan each time they were edited to see if new uses inside headers had been added. If this should be done by a bot, it seems better suited to something like WP:WCW that processes database dumps. Anomie ⚔ 01:17, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

OK, thank you for that. I'll post a request at WP:BOTR. WT79 ^{(speak to me | editing patterns | what I been doing)} 15:56, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comedy-mystery_film&action=history 2A02:C7F:6E64:1C00:614F:DF63:DA36:F60A (talk) 18:46, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

You need to update the redirect with the en-dash (Comedy–mystery film) to point to the same target for your changes to stick. I have now done so. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:52, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Lists of identical options

This could probably be resolved by comparing DOI values. ISBN would be useful too where relevant. Not clear if the bot uses any filter to disambiguate, or whether it would be worth the effort, but this problem is probably not going to get any smaller with time. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 07:48, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

All the bot does to try to avoid duplicates is sort parameters, normalize whitespace and some punctuation, and remove accessdate, accessmonth, accessmonthday, accessdaymonth, and accessyear params. I really don't want to try to bake too much into it, as that seems likely to make it more fragile. I'd rather have the bot complain on talk pages than pick a wrong option, since it already picks a wrong option in certain cases where there's only one option.

I note one of the entries there (the one from Bruniaceae) has a different DOI for some reason. And even if they all had the same DOI, the bot would still have to somehow choose which one to use. With or without the author and/or journal linked? With or without |doi-access=free? With or without |format=PDF? And so on, without actually being able to understand any of it. Anomie ⚔ 13:12, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Relisted discussions still showing as open

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 August 21#Category:American people of Iraqi-Arab descent is listed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Old unclosed discussions, even though it was relisted. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:29, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

@Pppery: Special:Diff/987120304 Anomie ⚔ 01:24, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

WP:RENAME

Hi, Will the bot archive request if the status is withdrawn? -- CptViraj (talk) 04:25, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

AnomieBOT looks for a comment with {{done}} or {{not done}} followed, on the same line, by the signature of an authorized user. Anomie ⚔ 13:05, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

I see. Thanks! -- CptViraj (talk) 12:14, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Remove templates when archiving ITN/C

The bot archives WP:ITNC but we're hitting the WP:TLIMIT on the archived discussions. I'm wondering if the bot could strip out the cot/cob at the start of every day to get our overall template count down. The content is useful in the main discussion but has limited value I think in the archive. Alternatively a subst on those templates would get us under the tlimit and preserve the content. I'm relying on the ITN Template to do some analytics hacks so please don't subst that one. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:18, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

My Perl sucks but if the bot is open source I can do a PR --LaserLegs (talk) 22:18, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@LaserLegs: The bot is open source, but it's not currently on Github or any place that does pull requests.

It's not the template count that's the problem, and removing the {{cot}} and {{cob}} isn't enough to make a difference for e.g. Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/August 2020. Your test is still broken starting from "(Posted) RD: Sixto Brillantes".

The limit being hit is the post-expand include size. On the August 2020 page, all the {{cot}} and {{cob}} combined contribute just 16,708 (0.8%); the transclusions of the portal pages contribute 1,181,313 (56%); all the {{ITN candidate}} contribute 1,777,757 (85%); and all the rest of the templates on the page contribute 137,017 (6.5%). So you'd probably do better to be looking at {{ITN candidate}} and {{ITN candidate/user}}. You may find Help:Substitution#Recursive substitution helpful if you want to go the subst route there, although I find that just removing the long "give credit" link from {{ITN candidate/user}} seems enough to bring August 2020 under the limit. Anomie ⚔ 03:00, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@Stephen: moving the discussion here so we don't have to cross-post. Thoughts on the above from Anomie? --LaserLegs (talk) 21:07, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Anomie for the clarification. LaserLegs, it’s your call how you tackle this as you’re the one who will be putting the work in. Can you able to run some tests to work out the best approach? Especially given that our ITN templates generate further templates (ITNC/user) a dual pass approach might be needed to strip them all out. Step hen 23:29, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

So when I blindly /{{ITN candidate/{{subst:ITN candidate/ on Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/August_2020 it starts printing the contents of the template (lots of #if) around the 10th. I tried to clone the archive to a userpage to hack on it and I got hit with a "deprecated source" error :p. Still working on this anyway. --LaserLegs (talk) 11:47, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Template subster error

The subster stopped ~12 hrs ago. Toolforge status page is reporting an error. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 03:04, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

That happens sometimes when there's Toolforge maintenance. Restarted it. Anomie ⚔ 12:28, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Actually, it looks like Toolforge's DB is still down for maintenance. Anomie ⚔ 12:38, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Restarted now. Looks like they gave up waiting on the maintenance and went to an alternative plan. Anomie ⚔ 13:00, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Restores unreliable sources.

Reference case: Heinrich Bongartz

Bot restored dead link to forum which I had just deleted as being an unreliable source.

Left following message: Rescuing orphaned refs ("forum2" from rev 988357926)

Can bot be reconfigured to avoid throwing this cybertrash back in the system?Georgejdorner (talk) 20:47, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

The bot cannot tell the difference between a human trying to remove a reference and doing so incorrectly, leaving a big red error in the article as you did here, and a human reworking an article and accidentally breaking a reference. The solution is for humans to completely remove the reference when they want to remove the reference instead of leaving errors behind. Anomie ⚔ 21:57, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

TFDclerk task has broken down.

Anomie, the TFD clerk task needs to be restarted. Techie3 (talk) 07:58, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Toolforge had an extended outage for maintenance, see mailarchive:cloud-announce/2020-November/000338.html for details. Restarted now. Anomie ⚔ 13:00, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

OTD

FYI, the task that updates the article talk pages with OTD dates hasn't worked in the past two days. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 08:12, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Toolforge had an extended outage for maintenance, see mailarchive:cloud-announce/2020-November/000338.html for details. Restarted now. Anomie ⚔ 13:00, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

PERTs are not updating

To editor Anomie⚔: example User:AnomieBOT/TPERTable, which has not updated since 10 November. Just FYI. P.I. Ellsworth ed. ^put'r there 05:52, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

To editor Anomie⚔: thank you very much for the fast fix! P.I. Ellsworth ed. ^put'r there 00:52, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Importance

Hi can you edit your bot so when it adds on states it doesn’t make someone’s to fill out the importance for the US, or can you edit it to have the US importance filled out thanks. Bigmike2346 (talk) 16:26, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

AnomieBOT hasn't run a WikiProject tagging task since October 2019, and before that not since 2015. I don't think it has done any US-related topic since 2010. If for some reason someone does request such a run (and I decide to do it), it's up to the requester to specify how the importance field gets filled out. Anomie ⚔ 23:05, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Could you make it for when the level of importance is low in all other category’s for the us project it will also be written as low, and the same for if it’s a stub? Bigmike2346 (talk) 00:58, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

"citation needed" when fact had a citation

This edit from the bot, adding a "citation needed" flag, is incorrect. 15:37, 13 November 2020 diff hist +19‎ m Sharon Oster ‎ Dating maintenance tags: ^{[citation needed]} Tag: Reverted Sullidav (talk) 03:02, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

The citation needed tag was actually added by Monxton in Special:Diff/988496575. AnomieBOT only added |date=November 2020 to the tag. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:20, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Apologies, this was my poor choice of template. Answered on User talk:Sullidav#Sharon Oster. --Monxton (talk) 13:50, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

TemplateSubster: Template:WikiProject United States Public Policy has too many transclusions - Fixed

* Note that TFD substitutions should now be done via User:AnomieBOT/TFDTemplateSubster rather than by (ab)using TemplateSubster!

In an effort to prevent disruption, I refuse to subst templates that have over 100 transclusions unless they are listed at User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force. Please either edit the template to remove it from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, manually subst the existing transclusions, or add it to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force to let me know it is OK to subst them. Possibly added by User:Funandtrvl at 2020-11-14T03:59:16Z. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:06, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

On 2020-11-14T06:42:51 AnomieBOT replaced a reference to {{WikiProject United States Public Policy| ...}} in Talk:Campaign finance in the United States by one referring to {{WikiProject United States| ...}} without checking to see if such a reference already existed. Now that Talk page has two different references to "WikiProject United States". I don't know enough about "WikiProject" anything to do anything sensible with this, except to try to call attention to this apparent duplication and conflict here and in Talk:Campaign finance in the United States. DavidMCEddy (talk) 08:21, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Pinging Funandtrvl (talk · contribs) who converted the template into a wrapper and marked it for automatic substitution. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:15, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I'm aware of the problem. I can go through and remove the template:WikiProject United States Public Policy on pages where it is duplicating the template:WikiProject United States/US Government. Or, is there a bot that could perform that function? The Public Policy project is defunct, and it's better that the still-tagged articles go under a related project, or two, so that they are maintained and monitored by a WikiProject. Funandtrvl (talk) 18:34, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

All transclusions from Template:WikiProject United States Public Policy have been moved to WP US Government or American Politics task force. Thanks for your patience! Funandtrvl (talk) 06:32, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	For making life easier with maintenance tags a gd fan (talk) 05:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

just curious

Why does AnomieBOT evade my "Human (not bot)" watchlist filter that excludes bot edits? soibangla (talk) 00:16, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

You deserve a lot of thanks for your work. Eschoryii (talk) 01:50, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Extended trial at BRFA?

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Usernamekiran BOT 4's latest status is extended trial. But Wikipedia:BAG/Status shows this as trial complete. Primefac tried to readd it as extended trial on the main page in Special:Diff/991526046, but bot reverted this with Special:Diff/991526805. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 06:35, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Too many different redirects to the templates, the bot didn't take into account {{BotTrialExtended}} when trying to decide which template came last. I'll update the bot to load the whole list of redirects to its target templates. Anomie ⚔ 12:53, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Done The bot should update the status table in a few minutes. Anomie ⚔ 13:12, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Anomie. By the way, do you know which of the {{BAG Tools}} templates are supported by AnomieBOT's clerking? eg does it handle things like {{BotOnHold}} as well, or only the approved/declined templates?

Also, slight feature request, is it possible for it to handle step #2 of User:SQL/How to close a BRFA (notification) - by observation, I've noticed most BAGs do notify on close? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:42, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

It pays attention to {{BotTrial}}, {{BotExtendedTrial}}, {{BotTrialComplete}}, {{BotApproved}}, {{BotSpeedy}}, {{BotDenied}}, {{BotExpired}}, {{BotWithdrawn}}, {{BotRevoked}}, {{OperatorAssistanceNeeded}}, and {{BAGAssistanceNeeded}}. It doesn't pay attention to {{BotOnHold}}, mainly because that apparently wasn't created until fairly recently and wouldn't affect anything other than maybe the "status" column at WP:BAG/Status.

It could, but do we really want it to? A search shows few uses. Maybe people just delete them without archiving, but it may be that the instruction never really took off in the first place. IMO people should have their BRFA page watchlisted to monitor the status and shouldn't need a talk page notice as well. So I'd like to see a confirmation (probably at WT:BRFA and cross-posted to WP:BON and WT:BAG) that we still want that notice to happen. Anomie ⚔ 13:20, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

I think the main reason why I personally don't notify are the reasons you mention: they respond to trials etc without prompting (or pinging) so they should be well aware when I approve a task. Additionally, since there's no semi-automation for approving/declining a task, it's just one extra (and again, slightly unnecessary) step to find the op and let them know. Primefac (talk) 19:27, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

TFDClerk issue on Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 November 17

Something weird still going on, described it at User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/TFDClerk. Primefac (talk) 19:25, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

This discussion is still open, but I had to manually add it to the list and the bot is removing it. Never seen this before, and it looks like the discussion has all of the proper headings etc. Primefac (talk) 19:23, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

So what happened is that the discussion was closed on November 25, and after 24 hours the bot stopped paying attention to the page anymore because there's no point in scanning old pages where all discussions are closed. Then on December 7 someone undid the close, reopening the discussion. But since the bot wasn't paying attention anymore, it doesn't see the reopened discussion. Ideally someone should probably relist it on a current day when they're going to do something like that. Anomie ⚔ 02:09, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

@Primefac: ↑ Anomie ⚔ 02:09, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

You know, that makes perfect sense (in a "no duh" sort of way). I'm in the process of closing it, so feel free to restart that task. Primefac (talk) 02:42, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

OTD query

Why did this entry list OTD2, when it was the first OTD appearance? [2] Or did I miss one? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:12, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Seems like a bug. The template seems happy to have skipped 1 though, which is probably why no one ever noticed. Anomie ⚔ 02:39, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, what I have noticed is that the template is indifferent, and when I change them to 1, the bot jumps to 2 ... so maybe not worth worrying about. Maybe because some articlehistories have the OTD parameter without the 1, so skipping to 2 is safest. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:56, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Bot not working?

A new FFD log was created manually. Some discussions at 2020 Dec 9 log are still open, yet the images have been already deleted. The 2020 Dec 9 log itself is not transcluded at FFD venue. Is the bot not working or something? --George Ho (talk) 06:23, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Looks like Toolforge DB maintenance took out some tasks with errors. Restarted. Anomie ⚔ 12:45, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Fixing bot

Would it be possible for the bot to be edited to include wikiprojects of the same name name when working on others. For example when you go from WP Iowa to WPUS with all the stuff in it, it there was already a WPUS the two things should be merged Bigmike2346 (talk) 19:08, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Watchlist: AnomieBOT edit missing "b" flag

Hey there. Very minor, but figured I'd mention it. In my watchlist, I have it set to filter out edits that are marked with the "b" flag, therefore hiding most bot edits. But this recent edit got through somehow and is lacking a "b" flag. Mentioning it here in case it is something on your end that you want to investigate. Or I could be misunderstanding something, or MediaWiki could be glitching. Who knows. Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:35, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Those edits often could use human review, so the "b" flag is intentionally omitted. Anomie ⚔ 12:42, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Redirect deleted

I created List of Royal Commissions in New South Wales as a redirect to List of New South Wales royal commissions, however it appears to have been deleted with the notation "AnomieBOT III deleted page List of Royal Commissions in New South Wales ‎(G8: Broken redirect to #List of New South Wales royal commissions" Is this a malfunction with the bot or have I made an error with the redirect - I have no way of knowing as the age has been deleted. --Find bruce (talk) 10:38, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

You made an error with the redirect in including an extraenous "#" in the link, so it was trying to redirect to a section of the redirect page itself rather than the article you intended. The content of the redirect was

#REDIRECT [[#List of New South Wales royal commissions]]

{{Rcat shell|
{{R from alternative name}}
{{R unprintworthy}}
}}

Feel free to recreate it with the link corrected. Anomie ⚔ 12:45, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

<3

JasonMoore (talk) 20:59, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Add these awards in black pink please

Please add PAK because it was in the list with reference. But

someone exclude it without any reason

2-SSE live awards and BP won two awards here 3-Hallyu kpop awards by kpopstarz and BP won 1 award here 4-Just Jared award and BP won 1 award here 5-J14 icon award and BP won 1 award here 6-Wowie award and BP won 1 award here 7- top ten Asia award and I don't how may they won please can you it and then add

And last these all are legit awards so please add Mochichipmunkkookie (talk) 06:08, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Mochichipmunkkookie, this is a bot, and it does not have the functions you are requesting. You might want to discuss the matter at Talk:Blackpink. Primefac (talk) 21:11, 2 January 2021 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

Crosswiki

Shouldn't this bot be theoretically able to rescue orphaned refs from the same article if it's linked on fr. de. ru. ? It would make translating and transitioning articles to other languages easier if this bot, or one like it, could search orphaned refs on the wikidata-linked variants of the same article. HLPD (talk) 22:19, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

References from other languages are most likely written in other languages, and the templates used in those other languages may not even exist here. Anomie ⚔ 12:55, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Might be, but often we use foreign-language refs even on en. I was drawn to ask because I realized that when I ported a simplified version of Haltlose personality disorder over to https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haltlose_personality_disorder or created https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Haltlose_personality_disorder and https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haltlose_personlighedsstruktur - that many of the refs were broken. I happened to notice and tried to fix them (labor-intensive, 30minutes of work, understand why other people do not)...but it occurred to me it was the sort of thing for which a bot which automatically noticed a broken ref name="homburger22" in the en. might check the German, Dutch and Danish versions of the page to see if it can find the ref...after all, the person who added it to en. must have found somewhere, and if not in a "Related Article" as it now searches, the next most likely source would be interwiki. HLPD (talk) 15:56, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

A ref to a work in a foreign language work is fine. But the ref still needs to use e.g. {{cite book|last=|first=|title=|...}} rather than {{kilde bog|efternavn=|fornavn=|titel=|...}}. Or if it's manually written, it may need to say things like "page" or "p" rather than "side" or "s". Anomie ⚔ 13:13, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Peer review request was archived when the page wasn't reviewed

I made a peer review request to have this page reviewed. The page was not reviewed but was still archived by this bot. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Economic_and_Philosophic_Manuscripts_of_1844/archive1&curid=65781841&diff=1003485858&oldid=987508461

-- Hanshans23 (talk) 17:19, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

It can happen. WP:PRG#Step 4: Closing a review says that unanswered reviews are allowed to be closed after 1 month of no activity, although due to the way the tracking categories are set up the bot doesn't normally get to it until after 2 months. Anomie ⚔ 12:57, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Deleted edits

Hi ! Can you please send me the deleted edits of User:Fade258 ?(Fade258 (talk) 07:23, 30 January 2021 (UTC))

Using quotes in reference names

Can you please explain to me why your bot thinks it is "fixing reference errors" here. My understanding is that quotes are necessary if a reference name includes one or more spaces, but otherwise are optional (unnecessary, redundant...). — Epipelagic (talk) 19:44, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Epipelagic: It's not just spaces, it's any character that is not one of 0-9, A-Z, a-z, full stop or hyphen minus. The ø character is not among those 64 which need not be quoted. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:49, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Oh okay... thanks very much — Epipelagic (talk) 23:20, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Bot ignoring {{in use}} tags

Hello, I'd like to report that AnomieBOT has ignored {{in use}} tags here, here and here. Victor Lopes ^Fala!•C 18:25, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

The TemplateSubster task never claims to honor {{in use}}. Anomie ⚔ 00:57, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

...and shouldn't it? Victor Lopes ^Fala!•C 02:30, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

No. It's a request, not a mandate. Primefac (talk) 17:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Musicians

Hi there! When your bot changes {{WikiProject Musicians}} to {{Wikiproject Biography}} (as it did in this edit and this edit), could it also remove the duplicate {{WikiProject Biography}} template? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:18, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

No, TemplateSubster is not that smart. It just knows how to subst templates. Sorry. Anomie ⚔ 12:55, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Miscategorized

Hello, for some reason, AnomieBOT categorized these articles as Category:Articles with unsourced statements from February 2,021 instead of Category:Articles with unsourced statements from February 2021. Do you know what might have happened? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:16, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Liz: When using {{Infobox settlement}}, tags like {{citation needed}} have to go in separate fields. For example, I fixed the first of these errors by moving the tag to the associated population_footnotes parameter. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:57, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Image deletion

Hello there AniomeBOT. I've been asking a few admins across wikipedia, but some come across as busy or aren't available. I need help on deleting the webpage at File:Andy_Patelesio.JPG. I'm actually the creator of the webpage and thought that I didn't want my own face as the picture for it. It would be well appreciated and grateful if you wee able to take it down.

Thank you and have a splendid day hope to here from you soon. By Andy Asani PatelesioA.patelesio (talk) 08:56, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @A.patelesio: AnomieBOT is a software robot and is unable to help you with queries like these. However, I can see from the logs at Wikimedia Commons, here, that a page named File:Andy_Patelesio.jpg (lowercase "jpg" not "JPG") was deleted a couple of days ago. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:20, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Who's a good bot? You're a good bot!

I dream of horses has given you batteries! Batteries promote WikiLove (📖💞) and hopefully this one has made your day more powerful. It is the power source best preferred by bots. 🤖 Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else batteries, whether it be someone you have had robot wars with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of batteries by adding {{subst:Batteries for you}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Alarob has given you batteries! Batteries promote WikiLove (📖💞) and hopefully this one has made your day more powerful. It is the power source best preferred by bots. 🤖 Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else batteries, whether it be someone you have had robot wars with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of batteries by adding {{subst:Batteries for you}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message! ℜob C. alias ALAROB 19:18, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for swiftly handling a tag task I forgot to do. It's a pleasure to work with you. -- ℜob C. alias ALAROB 19:18, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Is it possible to stop the bot from reinstating the deleted Template:Bug?

This is a minor issue, but we are trying to clear out User:Plastikspork/Transclusions of deleted templates/1 and related database reports. See this diff and the prior one. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:15, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Sigh. Updated the changelog to work around this deletion. Anomie ⚔ 21:07, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I know, no rest for hard-working bot ops. The root problems here are that Special:WantedTemplates has a max of 5,000 entries and it generates only once a month, so we have to clear out as many entries as we can so that we can eventually get to the end of the list. Until then, there are mainspace transclusions of nonexistent templates that don't show up on the report. It's all a giant kludge, but we're just gnoming away, trying to make WP perfect.... – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:10, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Russ people

Hi you closed the article of the Russ people, can you just delete the word "Muslim" and replace it with the word "Arab" on the authority of Ibn Fadlan, in order to distinguish between him and the Persians only

thank you Mouadszx123 (talk) 21:44, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Mouadszx123, this is the talk page of an automated account (i.e. a bot), and thus likely didn't close or officially "do" anything. You might want to double-check the page you were looking at and attempt to determine who actually made the decision you wish to contest. Primefac (talk) 12:17, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

POTD bot didn't run

Hi there, just a query as to why the POTD bot didn't run last night? From what I can gather, AnomieBOT is supposed to have created the page Template:POTD_protected/2021-03-27 at around 22:00 last night, but it failed to do so. The status page is showing a status of "job missing" for POTD page creator as well as various other things. Is there an easy way to resolve this so that it runs correctly tonight? Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 11:39, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Looks like Toolforge had some sort of problem, but it seems to be resolved now. Anomie ⚔ 21:52, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Citation

The song was cited before that you reverted today. Can you kindly state the reason behind its deletion? Fitzwilliams (talk) 14:53, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Fitzwilliams: AnomieBOT is not a human editor. For the rest of us, please provide links - or better still diffs - so that we can better understand what your difficulty is. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:28, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

@Fitzwilliams: Given that you have only edited one article recently, I can guess you're referring to edits on Jamie Dornan. AnomieBOT merely added |date= to a maintenance tag in its edit; the revert was done by a human editor in the previous edit. You should discuss it with them instead. Anomie ⚔ 13:46, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

OrphanReferenceFixer: Blacklisted orphaned reference in Solidarnost Arena - Fixed

When trying to fix orphaned refs in Solidarnost Arena, MediaWiki's spam blacklist complained about sportsmatik.com. This probably means someone didn't properly clean up after themselves when blacklisting the link and removing existing uses, but a human needs to double-check it. The attempted changes were:

Solidarnost Arena revision 1018865313:
- Rescued "sportsmatik" from rev 1011198842
  Removed in revision 1014629646 by Zoglophie (talk • contribs • logs) with comment "/* Description */Blacklisted spam" (removed 210/18581 bytes, 1%)

You might also use {{subst:User:Anomie/uw-orphans|1=rm diff|2=fix diff}} to let the remover know, if their edit summary indicates they were specifically removing the blacklisted ref. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:47, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Why am I mentioned here again (for 3rd time) ? 🌌Zoglophie🌌 12:15, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Zoglophie: Because you have a habit of removing blacklisted references but leaving "orphan" references to the name behind, which results in a big red error in the article. When you remove a blacklisted reference, be sure to remove any other references using the same name as well. Anomie ⚔ 12:48, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Didn't knew about that, will try to solve the problem. Regards 🌌Zoglophie🌌 13:04, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

OrphanReferenceFixer: Blacklisted orphaned reference in Faye Dunaway - fixed

When trying to fix orphaned refs in Faye Dunaway, MediaWiki's spam blacklist complained about filmreference.com. This probably means someone didn't properly clean up after themselves when blacklisting the link and removing existing uses, but a human needs to double-check it. The attempted changes were:

Faye Dunaway revision 1019697526:
- Rescued "filmreference" from rev 1019257441
  Removed in revision 1019697450 by Ched (talk • contribs • logs) with comment "rm blacklisted link" (removed 203/97015 bytes, 0%)

You might also use {{subst:User:Anomie/uw-orphans|1=rm diff|2=fix diff}} to let the remover know, if their edit summary indicates they were specifically removing the blacklisted ref. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:55, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

I have NO idea what you're saying or asking of me. If you're complaining about an edit - feel free to revert it. — Ched (talk) 00:08, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
- AnomieBOT is a bot, not a human editor. In this edit, you removed a named reference but left behind a <ref name="filmreference"/> that had been referring to it, which resulted in a big red error in the article. AnomieBOT tried to fix it by replacing that <ref name="filmreference"/> with the ref content that had been removed, but as the link is blacklisted it failed. So it complained here so a human could look at things in context and fix it. It looks like you did so in Special:Diff/1019712999. Anomie ⚔ 12:28, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:BAG/Status tweak

I've started a discussion about this table and potentially changing it, see the same-titled thread at WP:BOTN. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 13:03, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Further requests for change at Wikipedia peer review

Hi Anomie, following a discussion at WT:PR, Special:Permalink/1020969927, could I request some additional changes to the bot:

When the bot closes a review, if the review is listed at (Template:FAC peer review sidebar), remove the link to the peer review page
Don't close unopened peer review pages (defined as reviews which have only ever been edited by one editor, or which are listed here: Template:Peer review/Unanswered peer reviews sidebar)
Change the definition of inactivity to one month
When above are done, point the bot to Category:Current peer reviews, instead of Category:Current peer reviews pending closure. This removes the unnecessary step of waiting for Wikipedia's internal category system to put the page in that category; the bot does already an excellent job of working out which reviews to close so there is no reason not to move it to the category that lists all active peer reviews.

These changes would provide more help at Wikipedia:Peer review and I'm most appreciative of your help so far including to my ridiculous request above :P. Please let me know what other information I can provide. Many thanks, Tom (LT) (talk) 03:00, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

@Tom (LT):

Done (mostly). For #1, per your previous request the bot will not ever close a review that's listed at Template:FAC peer review sidebar so I didn't add code to do that. For #3, the definition is already 1 month; it formerly took longer because the templates didn't populate the category the bot looked at for 2 months. I also removed the code checking Category:Requests for peer review pending closure, which I see you had deleted. Anomie ⚔ 18:57, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank YOU! Is there a log somewhere where I can keep an eye on Anomie Bot's good work? Tom (LT) (talk) 07:45, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

There's no public log for this task. You could watch for edit summaries linking to User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/PeerReviewArchiver. Anomie ⚔ 12:54, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, great. Also regarding featured articles - SandyGeorgia is the editor involved with peer review related FA articles and has indicated she'd also be happy if the bot could auto close those reviews after one month of inactivity also (on the page we linked). You can see how the list has massively blown out: Template:FAC peer review sidebar) so I think the bot's work would be quite useful there also. Would that be possible? Tom (LT) (talk) 04:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

It's possible, but it might take a little bit to get around to coding it. Anomie ⚔ 11:01, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Pending changes task bug

For AnomieBOT III's TFA pending changes task, it looks like there is a bug where if a page is already protected with pending changes, the bot will incorrectly modify the expiration date. See [3] for an example. If a page is already protected with pending changes, then the bot shouldn't modify the pending changes settings. Mz7 (talk) 00:55, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

I've cross-posted this to the bot's task request. Primefac (talk) 01:00, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Oops.

Fixed Anomie ⚔ 11:00, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Good bot. CanadianOtaku ^{Talk Page} 00:50, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

User:AnomieBOT III

Hello, Anomie,

Typically, AnomieBOT III updates its broken redirect list every 6 hours but it's now missed two updates. I guess it's possible that we've gone 12 hours without any broken redirects on the entire project but I haven't seen that happen before. Just thought I'd inquire now as I won't be awake when its next update is due to be posted. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:49, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Looks like toolforge is having some replication lag, toolforge:replag is reporting 20 hours of lag at the moment. Anomie ⚔ 01:52, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Well, that would explain things. I also reported a similar problem with Bernstein Bot. Thanks for investigating. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:32, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

User:AnomieBOT/EDITREQTable

Hi, can AnomieBOT be updated to reflect the rename of Category:Requested edits to Category:Wikipedia requested edits over at User:AnomieBOT/EDITREQTable? I manually updated the page, and naturally the bot reinstated the old category name. ✗plicit 12:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

More importantly, your changing of the category made the bot empty the table.

Done Anomie ⚔ 13:11, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

DRV discussion deletion problem

AnomieBOT keeps removing the transclusion of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2021 May 31 from Wikipedia:Deletion review/Active.[4] I'm sure it is due some garbage at the header of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2021 May 31. Can you see to this, please? It's beyond my abilities. Thincat (talk) 18:22, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Thincat: Special:Diff/1026383100 should fix it. I just followed the instructions about using {{subst:drv2}} and looked at what differed from what was there. Anomie ⚔ 23:34, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@S Marshall: You may be interested in the above too, given your edits to Wikipedia:Deletion review/Active. Anomie ⚔ 23:37, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you.—S Marshall T/C 08:09, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

That certainly looks all right now to me. Thank you very much indeed. Thincat (talk) 08:11, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Small modification request to TemplateTalkRedirectCreator

Hey, could you modify the code in the task TemplateTalkRedirectCreator to use the canonical name of the template {{Redirect category shell}} and also move the tag {{R from remote page}} to a new line as it's easier to read and add other tags. Thanks. Gonnym (talk) 12:45, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Done I also added a blank line between the redirect code and template and started using {{R from remote talk page}}. Anomie ⚔ 11:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Could you also modify the task EnDashRedirectCreator, changing "Redirect shell" to "Redirect category shell" and adding new lines? Gonnym (talk) 10:11, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Done Anomie ⚔ 11:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Mistargeted welcome messages.

Hello! I just reverted an edit from this bot to the *wiki* page for "Tropism".

It looks like the bot needs better targeting to limit user welcome messages to user pages.

Edit: Oh. It looks like an IP user added "\{\{hello\}\}" (no backslashes) to the end of the page and the bot replaced the template message with the contents of the template message. Probably should add a condition to limit template replacement for that template to user pages.

211.245.254.29 (talk) 00:45, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Indeed, it was not the fault of AnomieBOT, which merely carried out one of its instructions - that all instances of {{hello}} should be altered to {{subst:hello}}. The problem edit was this one. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:16, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of Regional railroad because of merger with List of U.S. Class II railroads

I entered {{Db-g7}} on this article and I transferred the content to List of U.S. Class II railroads --109.242.232.159 (talk) 10:37, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Restoration of Cranadium gibbosum

I restored this redirect (monotypic sp.) - my typo: Cranadium gibbosum can be deleted and Cranidium gibbosum is correct - thanks. Roy Bateman (talk) 09:00, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Please do not edit any resourceful information as you apparently did to the article Gujarat Sultanate.

When you edited the article Gujarat Sultanate, you edited the main heading, but you did not edit the origin page, in which you are contrasting two different statements in the article. At least two verifiable sources say the origins of the Sultans were Khatris who converted to Islam. Please also do not edit nor remove any resourceful sources.

Here are some sources about the origins of the Gujarati Sultans' origin^[1] ^[2]^[3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by GujaratiHistoryinDNA (talk • contribs) 14:06, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Um... GujaratiHistoryinDNA, you're posting at a bot talk page, and Special:Diff/1033078153 is the only edit the bot made (which is just dating a tag). You might want to check the history of the article to figure out who you actually should be talking to. Primefac (talk) 18:54, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

References

^ Misra, S. C. (Satish Chandra) (1963). The rise of Muslim power in Gujarat; a history of Gujarat from 1298 to 1442. Internet Archive. New York, Asia Pub. House. p. 137. Unlike most other military captains who founded independent Sultanates on the ruins of Sultanate of Delhi, Zafar Khan was not a foreign muslim. He was a convert to Islam from a sect of the Khatris known as Tank. The Khatris were an agrarian people belonging mainly to South Punjab, claiming descent from the Kshatriyas of old.
^ Kapadia, Aparna (2018). In Praise of Kings: Rajputs, Sultans and Poets in Fifteenth-century Gujarat. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 120. ISBN 978-1-107-15331-8. Gujarati historian Sikandar does narrate the story of Muzaffar Shah's ancestors having once been Hindus "Tanks" a branch of Khatris who trace their dynasty from the solar god.
^ Wink, André (1990). Indo-Islamic society: 14th - 15th centuries. BRILL. p. 143. ISBN 978-90-04-13561-1. Zafar Khan Muzaffar, the first independent ruler of Gujarat was not a foreign muslim but a Khatri convert, of a low subdivision called Tank, originally from Southern Punjab.

Date parameter issue

Hey ABOT: so here's an obscure one: when you date the {{cn}} tag, and the tag is located within another template, such as infobox, the category created by the added date parameter is misformatted, with a comma separator in the year, such as Category:Articles with unsourced statements from July 2,021 and so the category does not exist.

Here's a diff.

Any ideas? UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:30, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@UnitedStatesian: (talk page stalker) This isn't the bot's fault; the problem is that the {{cn}} is misplaced. According to Template:Infobox settlement/doc#Usage, tags such as these must be placed in one of the "footnotes" fields, not in the data fields. The problem, as you saw, is that any numbers in the data fields are automatically reformatted. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:18, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. UnitedStatesian (talk) 10:54, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

AfD erroneously archived on delsort pages

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Height 611 UFO incident (2nd nomination) was erroneously moved to archives on delsort pages with outcome "(unknown)". This has been manually undone. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 12:47, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

EDIT: It happened again. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 17:40, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@LaundryPizza03: Please provide WP:DIFFs of the edits concerned. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:35, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Redrose64: At Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Events only: first archival and archive entry, second archival and archive entry. The diffs at the discussion's other 3 delsorts (Russia, Paranormal, and Aviation) are similar. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 21:09, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

My guess is that there's something unusual about the formatting which happens to match the test that determines if an AfD is closed. The box in 5Q5's first post is certainly uncommon. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:53, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

I changed the formatting of that comment to a collapsible and re-enabled the DeletionSortingCleaner task. I will come back if that doesn't fix the issue. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:47, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Feel free to correct my posted content as needed to resolve the problem if it persists. The code for the plain div box I used was copied and pasted from Help:Talk_pages#Boxes_–_general. 5Q5|^✉ 10:47, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

It was that comment. I've updated the bot to look for something more specific to XFD closures. Anomie ⚔ 12:03, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Billy Preston

I do not understand why the Billy Preston cover of Heroes was removed. I am listening to it right now. There is a YouTube video. It’s all over the internet. Why would you remove a specific artist’s cover or a song? Spiel (talk) 01:41, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Spiel: I do not understand why you are blaming AnomieBOT (which is a bot, see the box headed "AnomieBOT is not a human editor.") for an edit that was carried out by Gorpik (talk · contribs). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:16, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

I am not blaming anyone. I just needed to understand why a legitimate fact was removed. Spiel (talk) 23:06, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Spiel: You posted on the user talk page of AnomieBOT (talk · contribs), where you wrote Why would you remove a specific artist’s cover or a song? You are clearly blaming AnomieBOT for that removal, yet I have proved that AnomieBOT had nothing to do with it, and that the removal was carried out by Gorpik, whose talk page this is not. I cannot explain why Gorpik removed it; and AnomieBOT is even less able to do so. In short: you're asking on the wrong page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:35, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

I'll be happy to answer any questions at the relevant article Talk page.--Gorpik (talk) 18:18, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

This was an honest mistake. I am sorry. In other news, why are you being so rude to me? I made an innocent mistake. Spiel (talk) 04:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

NewArticleAFDTagger stopped working

Apparently, NewArticleAFDTagger has stopped working for over a week already. The two most recent talk pages created by that task (including deleted ones) were Talk:2014 Lubbock mayoral election and the deleted page Talk:Amir Shaikh, both of which were created 9 days ago. So, why did the task stopped working, and is there anything one could do to restart the task? GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 03:25, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Well, jokingly, one could pretend that there is a window that says "NewArticleAFDTagger has stopped working" (or if one is on Windows XP, "NewArticleAFDTagger has encountered a problem and needs to close. We are sorry for the inconvenience."). GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 03:34, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

It's choking when trying to process the creation of ﷐ (U+FDD0), AnomieBOT's Perl code was converting it to � because U+FDD0 not actually a valid Unicode character. I'm surprised MediaWiki even allows that character, here or in page titles. Anyway, I fixed AnomieBOT to pass through characters like U+FDD0 when that's what it's given. Anomie ⚔ 04:34, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Tnx Yeissensura (talk) 19:40, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Good Bot Barnstar!

For helping people, like me, an anon, to date maintenance templates, and other stuff. Good work Anomie!

Also, why Perl dude? Couldn't you just made it from Python or Java? They both have excellent API and extension support. Maybe you could convert it to Python or Java, maybe not Java, but you get what I mean, right?
103.24.107.253 (talk) 09:58, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Why not Perl? It's my go-to language for quick scripts that do things more complex than what's easily doable in Bash. Rewriting it at all would be a big project, and first I'd have to learn Python (which I've never yet gotten around to). Anomie ⚔ 12:02, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Odd edit

Your bot seemed a bit confused with this edit [5]. I've undone it for now. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 14:06, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

This is not the bot's fault, it's the fault of an IP vandalizing the article, and the bot is just doing what it was told to do. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:21, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Pointless deletions

Hi, would it be possible to give users even 15 minutes to get the main article up before your bot deletes redirects? For example, your bot deleted this page, which I had created to redirect to Anfisa Ageeva, which was created 10 minutes later. Now I have to recreate the redirect (hopefully not in the plural; I haven't had a chance to look at the other ones yet), which is just annoying and pointless. Thanks. -Yupik (talk) 11:59, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@Yupik: You created the redirect, then four and a half hours later you created the target article. The obvious and best thing to do would be to create the target article first rather than creating broken redirects in the first place. Anomie ⚔ 00:42, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

My apologies for snapping at you; it was crass of me. :/ -Yupik (talk) 22:11, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

A WikiProjectTagger run for Marvel Cinematic Universe task force

Hello. I'd like to request the bot to run its WikiProjectTagger to tag relevant articles for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Marvel Cinematic Universe task force. A run of this bot is being discussed (and supported) here. The run would be for all articles within Category:Marvel Cinematic Universe and Category:Marvel Cinematic Universe drafts to tag the templates {{WikiProject Film}} and/or {{WikiProject Television}} with |mcu=yes. In thinking through this request, I believe there may be some articles, etc. that might not have either of these templates. If that is the case, does the bot have the ability to add full templates? If so, {{WikiProject Film}} should be the one that is added, with the "mcu" parameter. I'm also pinging @Gonnym: who was helping me (and pointed me to this bot) in case they see any issues with the proposals or anything that should be added. If there are any questions, please let me know. I am watching but a ping wouldn't hurt either. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:28, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Also Category:Marvel Cinematic Universe task force and Category:Marvel Cinematic Universe templates. Gonnym (talk) 08:36, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Favre1fan93 and Gonnym: Should classes and/or importance be copied from other banners? Other than that, it looks like I have all the info I'll need. Ping me when the discussion is closed. Anomie ⚔ 12:00, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Classes yes, as we are just a task force, so we'd take the class designation of either the Film or Television banner as it exists. I'd say importance let's hold off, as we might want to first establish out of our articles what should be defined as what. Anomie as we are running just within our defined categories (and not a wide breadth of them), the discussion has no objections and can be considered closed. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 13:13, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Anomie there wasn't anyone opposing to this in the discussion. Can the bot begin with the tagging? Gonnym (talk) 11:36, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Favre1fan93 and Gonnym: So... There's only 108 pages in all four of those categories. Is that really all you intended? If you wanted "all subcats", please have at least two project members look through the list at User:Anomie/Sandbox8 and confirm that every category actually does have valid articles. You can delete any from the list that don't. Anomie ⚔ 15:00, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, the intention was all sub-cats and all pages in the sub-cats. We've worked on the category tree over the years so there shouldn't be any page that doesn't belong there. I've sorted the list into two groups, Those that should have the TV template and those that should have the Film template. In both situations just add |mcu=yes. In some situations there might be both templates, that's ok and add the parameter to both. Gonnym (talk) 15:07, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, Gonnym's delineation looks correct for categories that should definitely have the Television template, and those that should definitely have the Film template. As stated, if articles within such categories happen to have both templates, that is fine and both should be tagged. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:26, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Favre1fan93 and Gonnym: Started the run. If you spot any problems and need the bot to stop, post to User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/WikiProjectWorker. Anomie ⚔ 12:32, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Favre1fan93 and Gonnym: Run is complete, including the three additional categories I saw got added to the list on the sandbox page. Anomie ⚔ 12:20, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Anomie! I saw that the bot continued to tag new pages in a known category so just thought that in case it continues to work behind the scenes, it should know about these. Gonnym (talk) 12:22, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! It all appeared to go as intended. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:33, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Giving you another ping @Anomie:. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:39, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I've been short of time lately. I'll try to get around to looking at this on the weekend. Anomie ⚔ 21:50, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thank you! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:42, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Done There were 134 pages. Anomie ⚔ 23:56, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Great, thank you! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:58, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

TemplateSubster: Template:RFPP has too many transclusions - Fixed

* Note that TFD substitutions should now be done via User:AnomieBOT/TFDTemplateSubster rather than by (ab)using TemplateSubster!

In an effort to prevent disruption, I refuse to subst templates that have over 100 transclusions unless they are listed at User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force. Please either edit the template to remove it from Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted, manually subst the existing transclusions, or add it to User:AnomieBOT/TemplateSubster force to let me know it is OK to subst them. Possibly added by User:ToBeFree at 2021-07-16T17:39:58Z. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I will fix this, but it needs testing at the moment ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:52, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

If there is a consensus that subst is appropriate, please update the documentation first; it now expressly states "This template should not be substituted."

The presence of that statement, unless there was a recent discussion that didn't get the docs updated, suggests that there is not a consensus to subst that template. TJRC (talk) 19:09, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

"Recent", well. There is [6], currently at WT:RFPP but soon archived as done, after many years. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:56, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Alright; I'll update the template doc. TJRC (talk) 22:05, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

I first thought about replacing all the "tlx" by "tlxs", but Cyberbot I and AnomieBOT handle this well enough, and those who manually use the template will be happier if they can continue to use the known syntax. They definitely can, so I've reverted my documentation change for usage convenience. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:09, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

IFDCloser: Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 September 14 is broken - Fixed

Help! A section in Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 September 14 contains the "is_closed" regex but not at the beginning of the section. Probably someone put the {{ffd top}} before a section header instead of after. Anyway, I can't do anything to that page until someone fixes it. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:06, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

This appears to have been caused by Special:Diff/1044269104. AnomieBOT should check for unsubsted close templates before closing a section itself. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 13:44, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

The bot already looks for {{ifd top}}, {{ffd top}}, {{ffdtop}}, and so on. But it didn't look for {{ffd-top}}. Anomie ⚔ 13:14, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

OrphanReferenceFixer: Blacklisted orphaned reference in Slime Rancher - Fixed

When trying to fix orphaned refs in Slime Rancher, MediaWiki's spam blacklist complained about levelskip.com. This probably means someone didn't properly clean up after themselves when blacklisting the link and removing existing uses, but a human needs to double-check it. The attempted changes were:

Slime Rancher revision 1044524316:
- Rescued "Level Skip" from rev 1044522752
  Removed in revision 1044524316 by Blaze The Wolf (talk • contribs • logs) with comment "Removing level skip because it's on the blacklist which I was not aware of" (removed 315/16084 bytes, 2%)

You might also use {{subst:User:Anomie/uw-orphans|1=rm diff|2=fix diff}} to let the remover know, if their edit summary indicates they were specifically removing the blacklisted ref. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:18, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused. I removed the link completely from the article because it's blacklisted. What could be left of it that I didn't clean up? Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 (talk) 18:21, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Looking at it, it appears the ref list is having issues, but doesn't the ref list automatically update from the sources that are in the article? Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 (talk) 18:27, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Nope. I've removed the last named ref (<ref name="Level Skip"/> if you were curious) and we're good now. Primefac (talk) 18:38, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Ah ok thank you! Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 (talk) 18:41, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey there!

This is HimuTheEditor, I just wanted to Thank you for helping in editing the page Let It Go. I just wanted to ask if this does not violates any rules or anything, could you help me in finishing a draft that is for an EP Oh My Messy Mind on Wikipedia. I have tried my best to complete but it still misses some stuff. Any help would be appreciated! Thank you! HimuTheEditor (talk) 07:39, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

HimuTheEditor, you've reached the talk page of a bot, so it's unlikely it will be of any help in improving any articles (other than doing its automatic jobs). Primefac (talk) 12:09, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Tagger request

@Anomie, we have found consensus to run WikiProject Tagger to tag all articles that use {{Infobox university}} (i.e. in Category:Articles using infobox university) with {{WikiProject Higher education}} and to canonicalize redirects. Could this be implemented? Thanks, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:40, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

I'll try to find time to look at it this weekend. Anomie ⚔ 12:30, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sdkb:

Doing... Anomie ⚔ 15:23, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sdkb:

Done Anomie ⚔ 22:45, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

@Anomie, thanks! Is it a one-time run, or will the bot auto-tag articles in this group from now on? It would be nice if it's an ongoing thing. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:30, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

It's a one-time run. Anomie ⚔ 00:23, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Anomie, ah, that's too bad. I hope it'll be possible to make a feature that does it whenever an instance pops up at some point. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 02:07, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Backlog of the week

@Anomie: The category that the bot added to the backlog of the week template wasn't reported as a backlog, the bot chose a wrong category at Category:Wikipedia backlog. Can you re-program the bot to make him not choose this category again and update the backlog of the week template afterwards? Thanks. ObserveOwl (talk) 19:41, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

No, I cannot. The selection is configured on-wiki by the values passed to {{User:AnomieBOT/RandomPage}} on Template:Backlog of the week. You're welcome to change that configuration if you want to, (assuming you have whatever consensus is needed among the users of Template:Backlog of the week, of course). Anomie ⚔ 00:32, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

[1] Misra, S. C. (Satish Chandra) (1963). The rise of Muslim power in Gujarat; a history of Gujarat from 1298 to 1442. Internet Archive. New York, Asia Pub. House. p. 137. Unlike most other military captains who founded independent Sultanates on the ruins of Sultanate of Delhi, Zafar Khan was not a foreign muslim. He was a convert to Islam from a sect of the Khatris known as Tank. The Khatris were an agrarian people belonging mainly to South Punjab, claiming descent from the Kshatriyas of old.

[2] Kapadia, Aparna (2018). In Praise of Kings: Rajputs, Sultans and Poets in Fifteenth-century Gujarat. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 120. ISBN 978-1-107-15331-8. Gujarati historian Sikandar does narrate the story of Muzaffar Shah's ancestors having once been Hindus "Tanks" a branch of Khatris who trace their dynasty from the solar god.

[3] Wink, André (1990). Indo-Islamic society: 14th - 15th centuries. BRILL. p. 143. ISBN 978-90-04-13561-1. Zafar Khan Muzaffar, the first independent ruler of Gujarat was not a foreign muslim but a Khatri convert, of a low subdivision called Tank, originally from Southern Punjab.

[1]

[2]

[3]